Monthly Archives: July 2008

OBAMA’S BIGGEST CON- BUYING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY’S NOMINATION

Well it seems the man who has built his campaign on “change”, the man who is so “against politics as usual”, the man who won’t take money from oil companies as he bragged in one of his campaign ads (which BTW, had been outlawed for years) has, in reality, become the master of re-defining the words “sleazy politician”.

Mr. Squeaky Clean, who “won’t take no PAC money, momma”, has no problem paying the DNC Superdelegates for their votes. Yes, boys ‘n girls we have the real reason Barack Obama is the DNC’s presumptive selective nominee. And all the time I thought it was the Kool Aid.

Silly girl, Barack’s a sleezoid in the mold of that famous Philadelphia Congressman that was convicted of taking bribes years ago, the one who uttered those immortal words, “Money talks and bullshit walks!”

Barack’s been a busy boy. His campaign’s PAC. Hope Fund (don’t you just love the sound of that name Hope Fund, and the choir sang Amen!) having contributed $710,900.00 to Superdelegates by March 28, 2008 . . . and amount that was more than three times as much as HillPAC. ($236,100).

What’s that you say? Candidates have PAC committee’s? Yup, and its legal and they get to “donate” money from their PAC committees to “help” other candidates out. This is from the wonderful post found on NoQuarter yesterday and written by DR. Lynette Long:

Politicians collect money for their campaigns but most Americans don’t realize that politicians collect a separate a pot of money called a Leadership Political Action Committee or PAC. These PACs are used to hire additional staff and pay for additional perks such as limos and first class flights. But one of the major reasons for these PACs is to donate to the campaigns of other candidates. Nancy Pelosi’s PAC is called PAC to the Future, Barack Obama’s PAC is called Hope Fund, and Hillary Clinton’s PAC is called HillPAC. Money was distributed by these PACs to the superdelegates to influence their voting. The Federal Elections Commission requires scrupulous reporting of how PAC money is obtained and how it is spent. This data can be retrieved at www.opensecrets.org.

Quoting from further down in the post:

After reviewing state and congressional voting records as well as PAC donations, members of Congress were identified that fulfilled the following four criteria: 1. These members endorsed Barack Obama. 2. The constituents of their state preferred Hillary Clinton. 3. The constituents of their district preferred Hillary Clinton. 4. They got more PAC money from Hope Fund than from HillPAC. These senators are Jeff Bingaman, Frank Lautenberg, and Jay Rockefeller. The members of the house are Jason Altmire, Dennis Cardoza, Jim Costa, Joe Donelly, Gabrielle Giffords, Baron Hill, Ron Klein, Patrick Murphy, Gerald Mc Nerney, Carol She-Porter, Zack Space, Niki Tsongas, and Charlie Wilson.

This chart demonstrates (more clearly than anything I could state) what’s really ailing this country and its politicians today. I don’t care if you consider yourself a Democrat, Republican, Independent, or any shade or combination of these, this should make you mad!

These Superdelegates are slime, in my book, and should be ashamed of themselves. If buying votes this way isn’t against the law, it should be. Richardson was accused of being a Judas when he jumped Hillary’s ship and decided to support Obama, even though Hillary had more votes than Obama in his state of New Mexico. Looks like we’ve got more Judas’ this year than you can shake a stick at.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, business, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

MSM IGNORES IMPEACHMENT & SEX SCANDALS UNLESS IT INVOLVES THE NAME CLINTON

Ah, impeachment and sexual misconduct by a public official, apparently these warrant little or no coverage by the MSM unless there’s a Clinton involved. How else can you explain what we’re NOT hearing and what’s NOT being reported?

Would someone answer this question, how is it possible the MSM has been virtually silent about former Senator John Edwards 2:30 am meeting with his paramour and love child? Granted, this has been reported by the National Enquirer, but absent a complete and outright denial from Edwards, why no follow-up? BTW, its not as if the Enquirer hasn’t been right in the past, right Rush?

I’m asking this question as a former Edwards supporter who greatly admires his wife’s courage and character. I’m asking this question as someone who always thought the Bill/Monica story was none of our business . . . that this should have always remained a private matter between Bill and Hillary . . . that it was never a story to have trotted out for the world to gawk at.

It has been suggested that one reason for the MSM not covering this story is because Obama is still considering Edwards as his VP. AND, if the MSM looks the other way, this pick could still be possible! Say what? It’s as good a guess as anything. This is a legitimate story. It does not have to be covered with the same heavy-handed partisan way the Clinton/Monica story was, but this needs follow-up, particularly if Edwards is (was?) being considered for the #2 spot on the ticket.

Now, on to impeachment, other than Jonathan Turley’s post here, last week, and an email from a friend, the MSM never brought my attention to this story. Friday afternoon I went to C-Span to see, indeed, hearings were taking place; a surprise given the fact Pelosi had taken the issue off the table 2 years ago. I had to Google this story this morning to get a concise article about what is taking place. Here is part of Friday’s Voice of America article:

US Congressional Panel Hears Testimony on Case for Bush Impeachment


25 July 2008

Robinson report – Download (MP3) audio clip
Robinson report – Listen (MP3) audio clip

A congressional committee has heard testimony about the case for impeachment of President Bush. VOA’s Dan Robinson reports, while majority Democrats have ruled out formal impeachment efforts, they approved the public hearing to examine limitations on presidential powers and arguments about what constitute impeachable offenses.

Critics say President Bush and Vice President Cheney should be impeached because of a range of alleged legal and constitutional abuses.

The list includes administration justifications to Congress and Americans for the war in Iraq, authorization of secret electronic surveillance, approval of harsh interrogation techniques, and defiance of congressional subpoenas.

Granted these impeachment efforts are driven, primarily by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and in some quarters just a mention of his name is “enough said” but is that a reason for the virtual silence. Yes, yes, some outlets have done reporting, but nothing major from the cable outlets.

Surely, what was happening on Friday was more important than the “newsless news” recently reported like, Obama’s plane lands in Germany.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democrats, HEALTH, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

REALITY CHECK – OBAMA WILL LOOSE IN NOVEMBER

Given the extraordinary non-stop continuous coverage Barack Obama has received since his selection as the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee, Obama should be leading McCain by many percentage points, right?

Despite all the manipulation of his candidacy by the DNC, his campaign, and the MSM, most of America isn’t buying what Barack is selling. During Barack’s world tour to beef up his foreign relations credentials, his ratings in the polls went down as McCain’s rose. Ann Richards once said, “You can put lipstick on a pig . . . that doesn’t make it Miss America.”

One need to look no further than Obama’s fund raising efforts in June for further proof that Democratic “party unity” is little more than fantasy. It may exist in the minds of DNC, the MSM, and a host of others, whose political fortunes are tied to Obama, but the reality is, Obama will lose this election because of his own hubris and lack of experience.

He and his campaign and supporters have turned off too many voters off. It just may be that the American voters are a lot smarter than Obama thought, even those of us who continue to support Hillary, who bitterly cling to our religion and guns, those of us who refuse to buy a pig in a poke.

Hey, what color did you say that lipstick is?

According to Newsmax, of the 311 fundraisers who bundled more than $100,000 in donations for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, only eight are on the list of contributors to Barack Obama’s campaign in June.

Their total for the month: just $19,250.

“The fact that fewer than 3 percent of Clinton’s donors have donated any money directly to Obama in his first month as presumptive nominee is likely to raise the eyebrows of some leaders in the Democratic Party who are hoping to see signs of unity,” the Huffington Post observed.

The Washington Post reported that a total of 2,200 individual Clinton donors — as distinct from the big-money fundraisers tracked by The Huffington Post — became first-time donors to Obama’s campaign in June. They contributed $1.8 million, or just 4 percent, of the $52 million the campaign raised last month.

6 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, LIFE, political party, political satire, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

OBAMA CAMPAIGN FEELS THE EFFECTS OF ANTI-OBAMA OPPOSITION GROUPS

While Barack is out there playing Super Star, while the MSM continues its to swoon over his every word, a quiet revolution is taking place . . . one that will change politics and the political parties forever.

The most recent polls show that John McCain, the man the MSM keeps telling the world is running the worst campaign since John Adams, the man the Obama campaign would like to paint as another G.W. Bush . . . that man is ahead of Obama is ahead in Colorado, virtually tied in Michigan and Minnesota, with Obama losing ground in Wisconsin.

The talking heads and pundits on MSNBC were truly confounded this morning as they reported the latest poll results. One of the quotes was, “something is going on that the people in New York and Georgetown don’t understand and have no idea what it is.” What’s going on is a quiet revolution.

Hmmm, well maybe if you guys took your heads out from your butts long enough to breathe some oxygen you’d notice the sheer number of anti-Obama/pro McCain groups that have sprung up since the DNC selected BHO as their nominee.

The strength of groups like the PUMA’s and over 300 others including groups of former Obama supporters cannot be underestimated. Why? Because in truth, Barack’s candidacy is built on quick sand. Sadly, it’s all show and no go, smoke and mirrors, fantasy disguised as reality . . . and, virtually, not a peep by the MSM. It’s almost as if they think by not mentioning the legitimate opposition to Obama’s campaign that we will all go away. Guess again!

Results from the latest Quinnipiac University/Wall Street Journal/WashingtonPost.com poll of the battleground states of Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin:

July’s poll


COLORADO:
McCain 46% – Obama 44%
MICHIGAN: Obama 46% – McCain 42%
MINNESOTA: Obama 46% – McCain 44% WISCONSIN: Obama 50% McCain 39%

In June’s poll, Obama lead in all four states


COLORADO: Obama 49% – McCain 44%
MICHIGAN: Obama 48% – McCain 42%
MINNESOTA: Obama 54% – McCain 37%
WISCONSIN: Obama 52% – McCain 39%

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tags: , , , , ,

4 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, business, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, John McCain, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

WHY IS THE NEW YORK TIMES OUTING CIA AGENTS?

Imagine my surprise last week when I heard Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe discussing the New York Times outing a CIA agent!

I know I’ve been wrapped up in the election, Obama, HRC, the DNC, PUMA’s and the like but I didn’t think I was that far removed to have missed this story. Well, better late to the game than never.

Well, it turns out the MSM has no stomach for reporting on this. Apparently, Valeria Plame being outed by Robert (Darth Vader) Novak is one thing, but when the Times exposes an agent it is justified!?! Guess not, right? Wrong! My God, how is this possible? Keith Olbermann missed an opportunity to be synthetically outraged . . . you mean no “Special Comment” on this outing?

Can we state this once and for all, the outing of any CIA agent by any source should be punishable in some fashion. It was wrong to out Valeria Plame and it was wrong of the Times to out Mr. Martinez.

There are many, many, people who view these politically motivated outings (which in my estimation they were) as treason. If a man or woman has the grit to become a CIA agent they should have a reasonable expectation they will not be outed by people in the country they are trying to protect.

Since it is possible an outing could, in fact, happen accidentally, this type of outing should be viewed as a 2nd degree offense punishable by (at the very least) losing one’s top security clearance, a fine or forfeiture of a significant sum of money, demotion, and a police record.

If in fact the outing was not accidental, like the recent Times action, that should be viewed as a felonious act and fines beginning at $250,000.00 and going upwards seem perfectly fine to me. If the lives of agents, their families, and contacts established over the years are placed at risk because of this kind of foolishness, jail time also seems appropriate.

AND, while I’m at it, I’m sick and tired of hearing talking heads and other assorted political hacks making statements like, “they weren’t really undercover!” Oh, really, and just how do you know that? SO to all lame brained media morons and other assorted fools who pretend to know, listen up. The truth is, the only people who know whether an agent is undercover reside at the agency, and that’s not you fella!

I don’t care if you consider yourself a liberal, conservative, moderate, right wing nut, or left wing nut, outing CIA agents is WRONG and Congress (such as it is) should move to end this once and for all!

New York Times Outs CIA Operative

In an astonishing stroke of irony, the New York Times has outed the name of the CIA operative who interrogated 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, over the objections of CIA Director Michael V. Hayden and a lawyer representing the operative.

Agency officials and legal counsel told the Times that publishing the agent’s name would “invade his privacy and put him at risk of retaliation from terrorists or harassment from critics of the agency.”

In an Editor’s Note linked from the story on KSM’s interrogation, the Times defended its decision by stating that “other government employees” had been “named publicly in books and published articles” or had chosen to go public themselves, by explaining that its policy “is to withhold the name of a news subject only very rarely,” and by arguing the operative’s name “was necessary for the credibility and completeness of the article.”

Times reporter Scott Shane describes his scoop as “the closest look to date beneath the blanket of secrecy that hides the program from terrorists and from critics who accuse the agency of torture.”

The CIA apparently believes that by publishing the operative’s name, the Times put the agent at risk for retaliatory strikes from such “critics” and terrorists, despite his here-described lack of participation in the agency’s “harsh interrogation methods.”

Of course, this is just the latest in a long string of Times articles that have leaked classified and guarded information critical to America’s security and that of its people and public servants. Alert readers have long since stopped expecting any level of consistency from the same liberal media that was obsessed with the naming of Valerie Plame (though they’ve been considerably less obsessed with the actual source of Robert Novak’s column, Richard Armitage).

The Central Intelligence Agency asked The New York Times not to publish the name of Deuce Martinez, an interrogator who questioned Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other high-level Al Qaeda prisoners, saying that to identify Mr. Martinez would invade his privacy and put him at risk of retaliation from terrorists or harassment from critics of the agency.

After discussion with agency officials and a lawyer for Mr. Martinez, the newspaper declined the request, noting that Mr. Martinez had never worked under cover and that others involved in the campaign against Al Qaeda have been named in news stories and books. The editors judged that the name was necessary for the credibility and completeness of the article.

The Times’s policy is to withhold the name of a news subject only very rarely, most often in the case of victims of sexual assault or intelligence officers operating under cover.

Mr. Martinez, a career analyst at the agency until his retirement a few years ago, did not directly participate in waterboarding or other harsh interrogation methods that critics describe as torture and, in fact, turned down an offer to be trained in such tactics.

The newspaper seriously considered the requests from Mr. Martinez and the agency. But in view of the experience of other government employees who have been named publicly in books and published articles or who have themselves chosen to go public, the newspaper made the decision to print the name.

—Mick Wright is a freelance journalist who lives in Memphis, Tennessee. His personal blog is at mickwright.net.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Congress, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Hillary Clinton, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

1431 Members and Counting – Join now

1431 Members and Counting – Join now

What am I talking about? How’s this . . . we’ve heard how angry some Obama supporters have become because of all the flip flopping that has become the hallmark of Obumma’s (sorry, I had to do that) campaign.

There’s a new site people should take a look at because its been formed by former Obama supporters. For those of us who never drank the Kool Aid it would be real easy to sit back and smugly say, “I told you so.” Might I recommend that we don’t do that. Imagine how we’d feel if HRC was flip flopping like Barack?

Click on the link above and take a look. While you’re there look at the videos, as well.

Posted using ShareThis

2 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, cable networks, Culture, Democratic National Committee, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, LIFE, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized

NANCY PELOSI IS A PUTZ

Let me state this up front. I do not admire Bush 43. I voted for Gore in 2000 and for Kerry in 2004. I was against the war long before Obama gave his speech about the war. I am a fierce moderate that is tired of both parties and the foolish games that they have been playing for years.

That having been said Bush’s approval ratings may be stuck around 29% but the Democratic Congress’ ratings are even lower hovering at (ta da) . . . 9%!!!!! I find it fascinating that a woman as incompetent as Nancy Pelosi would chide the President Bush and talk about cleaning up his messes!

Let’s face it, Nancy Pelosi is no Hillary Clinton! Remember her promises about cleaning up Congress? How ’bout taking the impeachment George Bush off the table within days of taking over the House of Representatives? The list goes on & on.

You can ask the same question of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid in the Senate. Name anything they have accomplished . . . Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Hello! Is anyone there?

=crickets=

Under the new Democratic leadership beginning in 2006 we’ve reached an impressive 9,000 plus earmarks while the nation is close to insolvency. And let us not forget, that virtually everything Bush has asked for, whether it was for the Iraq war, the lousy economy, etc. has been granted by this Congress!

If that’s not enough for you, how ’bout this? Unless you caught this on FOX or subscribe to an alternative news source, chances are you didn’t hear this one. Investor’s Business Daily called for Pelosi’s impeachment! As always, the MSM is too busy cheering on Obama to look and see anything else that is news worthy.

A major business publication is calling for the impeachment of the Speaker of House and MSNBC, CNN, and the rest of the media morons are feeding us with more “newsless news” like the Obamas depiction on cover of the New Yorker.

Monica Showalter of Investor’s Business Daily was on to talk about an op-ed in her paper today stating that Nancy Pelosi has gone from “Feckless to Reckless” regarding her recent dumbass plan to partially drain the strategic oil reserves. IBD calls on Pelosi to resign. From the article:

Despite polls showing Americans in favor of drilling more oil from America’s huge untapped supplies, Pelosi won’t allow it. She just wants to empty our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for a short-term fix to get through Election Day.

It’s an irresponsible suggestion, signaling not only an ignorance of how the economy works but also a willingness to place the nation at risk in the case of emergency.

Last Tuesday, Pelosi sent a letter to President Bush urging him to release a “small portion” of the nation’s 706 million barrels of strategic-reserve oil to bring down prices.

OK all you PUMA’S, Democrats for McCain, Christian conservatives, pals of Ann Coulter, past Obama supporters that are finally seeing the light. Remember this . . . a vote for Obama is a vote for Pelosi, Reid, and a government controlled by these ya hoos. If that doesn’t scare you

. . . I’ll bet you can finish the sentence!

2 Comments

Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, business, cable networks, Congress, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, political party, politics, RANDOM, Uncategorized